I am no Thomas Friedman fan but isn't he simply asking a provocative rhetorical question? The real solution is non-intervention but it is interesting to note that despite 10,000 articles that have appeared over the past 4 years about the USA and Saudi Arabia using jihadist proxies to destroy Baathist rule as the first step in making war with Iran, the actual policy has objectively been to accept Assad as the lesser evil.
Juan Cole is probably a bit too young and a bit too removed from the Vietnam antiwar movement but it was the mass demonstrations that had the effect of fomenting a rebellious attitude in the ranks of GI's in Indochina that made continuing the war impossible. For example, troops would vote on whether to take part in an action when they weren't "fragging" their officers. In terms of the impact of yesterday's action, you have to understand it dialectically. Mass actions spur local organizing, just as was the case during the Vietnam antiwar movement. Finally, with respect to a PAC, that would be an exercise in futility since by definition any elected official in Washington is beyond reach at this point. Corporate power is absolute, at least in the political arena. We need a radical party to challenge the 2-party system, not PAC's to influence those who are in the back pocket of Exxon, BP, and the coal companies.
© 2026 All Rights Reserved
I am no Thomas Friedman fan but isn't he simply asking a provocative rhetorical question? The real solution is non-intervention but it is interesting to note that despite 10,000 articles that have appeared over the past 4 years about the USA and Saudi Arabia using jihadist proxies to destroy Baathist rule as the first step in making war with Iran, the actual policy has objectively been to accept Assad as the lesser evil.
Juan, I am surprised that someone with your erudition can talk about "Stalinism" in 1919. Maybe you meant Marxists. If so, that is even worse.
Juan Cole is probably a bit too young and a bit too removed from the Vietnam antiwar movement but it was the mass demonstrations that had the effect of fomenting a rebellious attitude in the ranks of GI's in Indochina that made continuing the war impossible. For example, troops would vote on whether to take part in an action when they weren't "fragging" their officers. In terms of the impact of yesterday's action, you have to understand it dialectically. Mass actions spur local organizing, just as was the case during the Vietnam antiwar movement. Finally, with respect to a PAC, that would be an exercise in futility since by definition any elected official in Washington is beyond reach at this point. Corporate power is absolute, at least in the political arena. We need a radical party to challenge the 2-party system, not PAC's to influence those who are in the back pocket of Exxon, BP, and the coal companies.